Irony in a judicial debate: analyzing the subtleties of irony while testing the subtleties of an annotation scheme

Abstract

Irony has been studied by famous scholars across centuries, as well as more recently in cognitive and pragmatic research. The prosodic and visual signals of irony were also studied. Irony is a communicative act in which the Sender's literal goal is to communicate a meaning x, but through this meaning the Sender has the goal to communicate another meaning, y, which is contrasting, sometimes even opposite, to meaning x. In this case we have an antiphrastic irony. So an ironic act is an indirect speech act, in that its true meaning, the one really intended by the Sender, is not the one communicated by the literal meaning of the communicative act: it must be understood through inferences by the Addressee. The ironic statement may concern an event, object or person, and in this case, the Addressee, or a third person, or even the Sender itself (Self-irony). In this paper we define irony in terms of a goal and belief view of communication, and show how the annotation scheme, the Anvil-Score, and illustrate aspects of its expressive power by applying it to a particular case: ironic communication in a judicial debate.

Bridging the Gap between Social Animal and Unsocial Machine: A Survey of Social Signal Processing

“…This includes, e.g., the expression of emotions like contempt [55] or signals of dominance [56]. In the same vein, laughter has been seen as a social signal of superiority and negative evaluation [57], [58]. In irony, not only the ironic smile but sometimes exaggerated body language or incongruence between different modalities signal teasing intent [58].…”

“…In the same vein, laughter has been seen as a social signal of superiority and negative evaluation [57], [58]. In irony, not only the ironic smile but sometimes exaggerated body language or incongruence between different modalities signal teasing intent [58]. Yet, evaluation can be conveyed also in indirect ways, e.g., expressions of compassion or tenderness may be a cue to negative evaluation and overprotective attitude [59].…”

“…Some expressions of social emotions are social signals in their own right because they establish a specific relation to others. This is the case of cues displaying contempt [55], shame [68], but also of laughter [58], and smile, especially if it is not simply the result of a person being in a positive state, like in the more individual view of smile maintained by [69], but an attempt to show that the positive state depends on the presence of others, like in the more social view in [70].…”

When Sugar-Coated Words Taste Dry: The Relationship between Gender, Anxiety, and Response to Irony

“…Some authors use ironic praise to refer to ironic utterances that are literally negative, such as “That's a horrible idea” (e.g., Schwoebel et al, 2000 ; Filipova and Astington, 2008 ). In contrast, other irony scholars define ironic praise in the exact opposite way, namely, by referring to ironic utterances that are literally positive, such as “That's a great idea” (e.g., Poggi et al, 2007 ; Poggi and D'Errico, 2010 ) (p. 306).…”

Verbal Irony

“…Some authors use ironic praise to refer to ironic utterances that are literally negative, such as “That’s a horrible idea” (e.g., Filipova & Astington, 2008; Schwoebel, Dews, Winner, & Srinivas, 2000). In contrast, other irony scholars define ironic praise in the exact opposite way, namely, by referring to ironic utterances that are literally positive, such as “That’s a great idea” (e.g., Poggi, Cavicchio, & Caldognetto, 2007; Poggi & D’Errico, 2010). In this discussion, we follow the position taken by the latter authors.…”